InfoMan
Posts: 471
Joined: 2/20/2017
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: mnottertail
quote:
ORIGINAL: InfoMan
quote:
ORIGINAL: mnottertail
quote:
ORIGINAL: InfoMan
quote:
ORIGINAL: mnottertail
The right of people to be secure in their persons..........think about it, dig up some information, instead of disinformation.
That is pure and raw disinformation right there.
The 4th Amendment not only doesn't say that, it was never meant to imply that or even suggest it. Attempting to twist the 4th Amendment of the US Constitution to mean what you want it to mean is not only disingenuous and ignorant, it is down right disrespectful.
So you can go screw right off you pathetic ignorant disrespectful shill of a boy.
How dare you try and twist Our constitution to fit your own stupid argument.
sorry you fucking pathetic and propaganda retard, it certainly does.
why dont you put the 4th amendment here?
so, you can go back to your little toilet stall you pathetic sick sad lying fucking sackless sucking calf, how dare you be such a fucking retarded pantshitting toiletlicker and buffoon.
The cop murdered the guy, end of story, and you defend it like the little nutsucker and coward you are. His life, his right of the people to be secure in their persons was seized unreasonably and you are a fuckwhistle of the lowest form of foetid shit.
oh, yeah, read Madisons notes, you fucking untutored cunt.
That is not what the 4th amendment means, and Madison did not in any way ever imply that when he penned the Amendment.
the 4th Amendment protects specifically against unlawful search and seizure of property and goods by the government against it's citizenry, one of the major components which initiated the revolution in the first place. Writs of Assistance provided to British Officers empowered them to search any residence or building without warning or supervision. Officers could then confiscate whatever they deemed to be 'smuggled' or 'improperly obtained' with out evidence, cause, or reason as to what made that judgement. And this shit should of been taught to you during Grade School Social Studies or American History.
It in no way protects a person in the security of themselves, or ensures them that they are to be 'be secure in their persons' specifically is it Every Implied. It is only your ignorant twisting of reality which makes it seem that way...
But what you have shown us is that you have a complete and utter disregard for the words of the Constitution and our History as Americans.
your ignorant twisting of your ignorance leads me to believe you are the vanguard of the anti-american communist nutsuckers, so it was the idea of the framers that cops should be able to shoot the citizenry on their faintest whim.
I think you need to consider that you essentially advocate that cops can shoot at will and kill american citizenry. You would do well in Nazi Germany, and Russia, but not in America. Your absolute disdain and disregard for the constitution is a sign of your foetid miasmatic anti-Americanism and your Hitleresque gooning and thugging.
Again, as you bring up the british, they have people there that are stopped and are under the influence of PCP. How many have been gunned down by cops there?
The 4th Amendment does not provide that protection.
the 14th Amendment does.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
but it wasn't written by the framers, nor did the Framers consider it as part of the Constitution. In fact, the Bill of Rights (the first 10 Amendments of the Constitution) was specifically penned to identify the limitations of the federal government, not the mundane nuanced methods and matters of individual law pertaining to each individual state.
The matters of policing the populace was relegated to the individual States - in the form of the 10th Amendment
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
It wasn't until after the Civil War when the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments ratified where citizens and their rights where finally protected through the Constitution.
Seriously - they didn't teach you this in American History?
Civil War History? The Reconstruction Amendments?
I find it funny that all you can do is spew baseless insult while you continually get proven wrong.
|
RE: BLM NOT SO MUCH - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread